The Wyatt Earp Drill

[threegun]

Stonewall, The drills the OP was running are definitely oriented toward someone who is entering an unknown situation. For all but the most extreme of situations, as an ordinary citizen, I am not going to be forced to separate good guys from unknown bad guys.

If I enter an ongoing situation unknowingly I will not know who the threats are until they become a threat. At that point there is no need to separate them from good guys.

I think that my time would be better spent, given the equipment and members available to the OP, in FOF training which caters to more realistic scenarios. Things like drawing while under attack, drawing against another armed man, getting off the x while under attack, and others based on likelihood and usefulness.

But threegun essentially what I am talking about is situtaional awareness.

SA or recognizing a potential threat early isn't going to be enhanced IMO by turning a corner and having 2 guys running at you while you decide which one to shoot.

To me SA is simply keeping your radar operating. Observe your surroundings as opposed to ignoring them. We usually don't need training to recognize a potential threat using SA. Now maybe some training designed to help us remain Situationally Aware would be good.

 

[threegun]

Reality is not going to follow into the drills that we all practice. You can practice how to react in certain scenarios, but the real goal is not the explicit curriculum that is being verbally taught to you. It is the implicit that is important(what is not verbally said but an unspoken objective), and in the drill case it is teaching you to react to the threat and improvise. To be fluid to the situation and keep your head on a swivel.

I have to agree that having to react to an unknown situation forces you to make decisions while under duress which is good. This can also be accomplished, IMO even better, in FOF yet using more realistic scenarios.

 

[maestro pistolero]

The likelihood of its being necessary in self defense is minimal.

Wholeheartedly disagree here. Any training that incorporates the cognitive part of the brain while it is being tasked with motor-skill duties is a huge plus in terms of increasing stress management. It could absolutely help prevent a terrible mistake , IMO

 

[threegun]

Wholeheartedly disagree here. Any training that incorporates the cognitive part of the brain while it is being tasked with motor-skill duties is a huge plus in terms of increasing stress management. It could absolutely help prevent a terrible mistake , IMO

I agree however this can be done in unison with a more realistic scenario set. Achieve the same stress management goals while focusing on something that actually has a snow balls chance of happening. Getting two birds with one stone is better IMO.

The OP was asking

But again I ask...any tweaks? Like or dislikes?

and I was tweaking.

 

[stonewall50]

@threegun:

I like your tweaks. They can ALL incorporate an unknown element. I have to say maybe I am not explaining correctly? Target distinction is more than just recognizing a threat to you. I HATE HATE HATE to use ABC's dateline or 20/20 investigation, but they DID make a point in their biased study that should be touched upon in drills. They had 2 shooters and 1 that was shooting students actually appeaared to be shooting at the bad guy who came into the room.

I guess basically what I am saying in target distinction is just that you learn to need to be eyes open to everything. Just because it is someone with a gun doesn't make them bad and it also doesn't make them good. I mean don't get me wrong either...al the tactics you are discussing are very important and should be practiced until they are instinct. They can be incorporated into different types of FOF drills though.

Perhaps target distinction can be applied to dogs as well? I will be discussing in another post though lol.

 

[moose_nukelz]

We have done training to see at what distance we could get a shot off from the holster when someone charges with a knife using airsoft and rubber training knifes. Less than 20 feet and the guy with the knife won, 20-30 feet was about half and half and over 30 feet we were able to draw and get a shot on target.

 

[threegun]

Stonewall50, I understand your concern over target recognition. I agree that distinguishing between good guy and bad guy is extremely important. I just feel that the odds of needing this skill are much much lower than say the odds of needing to defend against a charging knife attack. Hence I would devote much much more practice time on the Tueller drill for example.

 

[AK103K]

I understand your concern over target recognition. I agree that distinguishing between good guy and bad guy is extremely important. I just feel that the odds of needing this skill are much much lower than say the odds of needing to defend against a charging knife attack. Hence I would devote much much more practice time on the Tueller drill for example.

Im not sure I see any difference between the two here.

Either way, you still have to ID that someone running to you does in fact have a knife (or gun, or what ever), and if hes amongst a number of people also running at or around you, who dont, you have to make a lot of instant decisions and deal with other things at the same time.

Threat assessment and ID is just a basic part of all this, and if youre carrying a gun, regardless of your purpose, its something you need to be able to do, especially under stress. One on one, or one on some.

Tunnel vision is hard enough to deal with, practicing to do so, just makes things worse. Working on anything that helps you stay in the big picture, especially when your brain is screaming to focus on one thing, is much more useful than constantly practicing one or two things of a more narrow scope, over and over.

One thing here with Tueller, since everyone is so caught up in its time space continuum thing, are you also practiced in your grappling (and since a knife is involved, bleeding ) skills to be able to deal with it if your timing is off? I know we're all gun people, but sometimes the gun "isnt" always the answer to the question, or at least, not immediately. Most of the "tests", assume the gun is, or will be the solution to the problem. Actually shooting/cutting each other, is really the only way to find out. Airsoft and a "chalked blade" help here too.

 

[threegun]

Im not sure I see any difference between the two here

We carry concealed. We draw when we see a threat. This means that we have already had to acknowledge a threat just to be legal to pull much less fire. Unlike a LE officer who must take trouble head on.

Threat assessment and ID is just a basic part of all this, and if youre carrying a gun, regardless of your purpose, its something you need to be able to do, especially under stress. One on one, or one on some.

For the civilian its more Situational Awareness than a true shoot don't shoot target selection like cops do. My SA identifies a potential threat. If the threat has the ability, opportunity, and intent to cause me death of grave bodily injury it gets a preventative action.

One thing here with Tueller, since everyone is so caught up in its time space continuum thing, are you also practiced in your grappling (and since a knife is involved, bleeding ) skills to be able to deal with it if your timing is off?

Short answer is no. Long answer not in a very long time. My hand to hand has had to be set aside due to illness recently. I'm working things out but will probably not get back into hand 2 hand. Just to easy to get hurt nowadays and my family needs my pay check. So while I have the knowledge I lack the necessary practice to deal with a knife attack unarmed. If the guy knows how to use the knife all but the very best trained are in trouble anyway.

 

[AK103K]

We carry concealed. We draw when we see a threat. This means that we have already had to acknowledge a threat just to be legal to pull much less fire. Unlike a LE officer who must take trouble head on.

I still dont see any meaningful difference. Trouble is trouble, and if you have to deal with it, then you have to deal with it.

The threat may not be initially visible, but still fairly obvious or apparent, and you dont have to see it to have your gun out. I'll err on the side of breaking "the rules" if I feel it warrants it. Better to be wrong and deal with that, than to be right and be behind the curve. Besides, you can still be discreet with the gun upholstered if you need to be.

For the civilian its more Situational Awareness than a true shoot don't shoot target selection like cops do.

Call it what you want, you still may have one from column A or one from column B, or even the possibility of one or more of each, all at the same time. Decisions still have to be made as things move along. In reality, everyone there is a shoot/dont shoot target at some point, no matter what.

I think we're basically on the same page here, its just we "see" things differently. Your more focused on certain things, and Im looking at it in a broader sense. The goal is the same, win at all costs, and hopefully youve had some varied forethought, and can keep the "costs" to a minimum. Better yet, just make the other guy pay.